The Importance Of A Duty Of Care Should Be Paid By Health Departments For Indirect Third Parties

995 Words4 Pages
In Sullivan, these same elements were instrumental in the courts decision in determining whether a duty of care should be owed by health departments to indirect third parties. In this case, the judges were concerned with maintaining a coherence in the law and the effect a duty of care would have on their statutory duty which is outlined in the Community Welfare Act 1972 (SA) ("the Act"). In section 25, The act outlines to ‘regard the interests of the children as the paramount consideration.’ Through the application of the hill immunity, the High Court concluded in a joint judgement that no such duty of care existed and public authorities were immune to negligence claims. The High Court held that a duty of the kind alleged would be…show more content…
Academia Jennifer Yule, who is disagrees with the hill immunity argues that there ‘needs to be a balance between the rights of a person’s liberties with the right of the police to do their job’.Individuals like the mother of the victim of a murdered in Hill and the father accused of sexual allegation of his own child can give be at risk of the chance of suffering extreme damages and a result of poor or negligent investigation, with no accessible compensation. The ideas underpinning torts and the law of negligence is aimed at loss spreading and to compensate someone who has suffered. However, the hill immunity principle can be at risk of discouraging this this. Yule, further argues that “public authorities need to be accountable, like other groups in the community who provide services and have responsibilities”. Thus, the hill immunity can be considered unfair and unjust and limited in accessing compensation. The dangers to children The application of the hill immunity in Sullivan can ironically have negative rmifications for children who the public authorities owe a duty to, despite the courts supposed aim of ‘treating the child’s interests as paramount.’ This idea is explored by academia Frank Bates who disagrees with the concept of the hill immunity, highlighting that ‘the child’s relationship with a parent is damaged by an inept medical or bureaucratic policy, practice or

More about The Importance Of A Duty Of Care Should Be Paid By Health Departments For Indirect Third Parties

Open Document